Skip to content

knowns OS Command Injection via Insecure LSP Binary Path Config in .knowns/config.json

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Aug 16, 2026 in knowns-dev/knowns • Updated Oct 6, 2026

Package

npm knowns (npm)

Affected versions

<= 0.29.1

Patched versions

0.30.0

Description

Overview

A critical Arbitrary Code Execution (ACE) vulnerability exists in the Knowns Language Server Protocol (LSP) detection and startup pipeline. The system blindly trusts the settings.lsp.languages.<lang>.binary field defined in the project-level .knowns/config.json file.

Because this field is never validated against an allowlist of managed binaries, and absolute paths are implicitly accepted, opening a malicious repository (or a legitimate repository where the config has been tampered with) results in the immediate execution of an attacker-controlled binary. The payload is executed twice per session: once during the initial runVersionCheck (health check), and again when the LSP server process is spawned via Server.Start(). When chained with the previously identified Config Overwrite vulnerabilities, this flaw yields a fully unauthenticated Remote Code Execution chain.

Affected paths

File Path Role Vulnerability & Execution Impact
internal/models/config.go Validation Gap Missing Binary Validation (CWE-829): ProjectSettings.Validate() enforces duration formats for task lifecycles but completely ignores the LSPLanguageSettings.Binary field. Absolute paths, shell interpreters, and untrusted executables are silently accepted.
internal/lsp/detect.go Execution Sink #1 Unsanitized Health Check Execution: Detector.resolve() passes the unvalidated override to exec.LookPath(), then invokes runVersionCheck() which blindly calls cmd.Run() on the attacker-controlled binary with CheckArgs.
internal/lsp/server.go Execution Sink #2 Unsanitized LSP Server Spawn: Server.Start() passes the resolved binary path to knownsprocess.Command() and spawns it as a long-running background process via cmd.Start(), executing the payload a second time.

Root Cause

Missing Validation in Configuration Schema

In internal/models/config.go, the ProjectSettings.Validate() function is responsible for sanitizing the project configuration loaded from .knowns/config.json. However, it only validates task lifecycle durations:

func (s ProjectSettings) Validate() error {
    settings := s.EffectiveTaskLifecycle()
    if _, err := ParseTaskLifecycleDuration(settings.ArchiveAfter); err != nil { ... }
    // NO VALIDATION FOR s.LSP.Languages[lang].Binary
    return nil
}

The LSPLanguageSettings struct exposes a Binary string field. When a malicious project is loaded, this string is passed unmodified into the LSP resolution pipeline.

Blind Execution in LSP Detector

In internal/lsp/detect.go, the Detector.resolve() function accepts an override string (from the config) and forces it into the execution pipeline:

func (d *Detector) resolve(ctx context.Context, root string, lang Language, override string) (ServerCommand, bool) {
    binaries := lang.Binaries
    if override != "" {
        binary := Binary{Name: override} // Attacker's malicious path injected here
        binaries = []Binary{binary}
    }
    for _, binary := range binaries {
        path, err := d.LookPath(binary.Name) // Accepts absolute paths (e.g., /tmp/evil.sh)
        // ...
        err = d.RunCheck(checkCtx, path, binary.CheckArgs...) // EXECUTION #1
        // ...
    }
}

d.RunCheck maps to runVersionCheck, which executes the binary via knownsprocess.CommandContext(ctx, path, args...).Run().

Unrestricted Process Spawn

In internal/lsp/server.go, when the LSP manager starts the server, it executes the same compromised path:

func (s *Server) Start(ctx context.Context) error {
    // ...
    cmd := knownsprocess.Command(s.Command.Path, s.Command.Args...) // EXECUTION #2
    cmd.Dir = s.Root
    // ...
    if err := cmd.Start(); err != nil { ... }
}

Attack Vector

Phase Request / Action Effect
1. Plant Attacker commits .knowns/config.json containing {"settings":{"lsp":{"languages":{"go":{"binary":"/tmp/evil.sh"}}}}} to a repository. Malicious config embedded in the project.
2. Trigger Victim (or AI Agent) clones the repo and opens it with knowns mcp or knowns browser. Auto-detection scans the project, finds a .go file, and loads the malicious config.
3. Execute (Health Check) Detector.resolve() calls runVersionCheck("/tmp/evil.sh", "version"). RCE Execution #1 occurs silently in the background.
4. Execute (LSP Spawn) Server.Start() calls cmd.Start() with the same binary. RCE Execution #2 occurs, spawning the malicious process as a long-running daemon.

Chained Attack Vector (Unauthenticated RCE):
If combined with the Config Overwrite vulnerability (via code.replace path traversal), a remote attacker can overwrite .knowns/config.json in a target project, inject a payload, and trigger an LSP restart (via docs.update or server reload), achieving Remote Code Execution without any user interaction.

Analysis

This vulnerability is a textbook example of Inclusion of Functionality from Untrusted Control Sphere (CWE-829), commonly known in the IDE/Editor space as the "Malicious Workspace" vulnerability (similar to historical CVEs in VS Code where .vscode/settings.json could point to malicious interpreter paths).

The core failure is the lack of a strict allowlist for executable paths. By relying on exec.LookPath(), the code allows an attacker to bypass binary name resolution simply by providing an absolute path (/abs/path/evil.sh) or a path containing a slash (./evil.sh).

Furthermore, the execution happens automatically upon project load. In modern AI-driven development workflows, AI Agents automatically scan project files (like .go, .ts, .py) to provide context. The LSP detector triggers on file extensions, meaning the victim or agent does not even need to explicitly run a "build" or "start" command; the mere act of the Agent indexing the workspace triggers the payload.

Fix

Patch is available right now at New Release.

References

@howznguyen howznguyen published to knowns-dev/knowns Aug 16, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Oct 6, 2026
Reviewed Oct 6, 2026
Last updated Oct 6, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Local
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(11th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')

The product constructs all or part of an OS command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended OS command when it is sent to a downstream component. Learn more on MITRE.

Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')

The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment. Learn more on MITRE.

Uncontrolled Search Path Element

The product uses a fixed or controlled search path to find resources, but one or more locations in that path can be under the control of unintended actors. Learn more on MITRE.

Inclusion of Functionality from Untrusted Control Sphere

The product imports, requires, or includes executable functionality (such as a library) from a source that is outside of the intended control sphere. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-86540

GHSA ID

GHSA-mc52-mwq4-vfx3

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.